Pond Boss Forums INTRO Questions & Observations man-made intervention; what and when?

At what point does a pondmeister intervene with natural animal events?
-
We were just confronted with this question and thought it might make for good discussion.
Donna-ski and I purchased our LNP property as a block of raw, unmanaged timber. We had a vision for a nature preserve and have done what we consider a pretty good job moving it along to fruition, albeit at a pretty slow pace. We recently were confronted with muskrat damage to our shore banks. This was unacceptable since it compromised the pond. We felt we made a good decision to intervene and have them removed by lethal trapping. Ironically, it was the first decision contrary to our commitment for a nature preserve. The trapper asked us if we would allow him to trap for coons and skunks, too. At first, it seemed like a good idea, anticipating that they would also be nothing but a nuisance...but...it just adds to the lethal direction we were leaning on what was supposed to be a nature preserve. He also asked if he could gig some bullfrogs. Same feeling from us. (btw, I know some of you are already thinking "uh oh, watch out bski...this guys sounds like he could wind up being a poaching problem". I have many reasons to put that fear behind me, so trust me and scratch that from the thread subject matter). My trapper was very receptive to my declination of his requests regarding coons, skunks, and BF. He said that he has many clients that feel the same way and respects the posture. He carefully reminded me, tho, that coons and skunks and possums can be the biggest negative factor in duck reproduction. This is no news to us, but delivered within the context of what we are considering caused us to take pause. Hmmmm....so at what point do we attempt to become the human version of Mother Nature and actively promote and kill species for the betterment of the community?
At this point, we define the breakpoint by whether an animal has become a nuisance that causes significant damage. The muskrats are tearing up our shoreline and could compromise 14 million gallons of water. That qualifies as a nuisance; decision is locked. But what of the coons, skunks, possums, and the other egg eaters. They haven't caused us a problem....yet....at least that we know of. But, how do we know if they aren't destroying duck and wild turkey eggs and propogation. And even then, how much is normal and acceptable natural selection and how much should be controlled? What of other predator/prey scenarios? It all brings me back to:

At what point does a pondmeister intervene with natural animal events?

Depends what your goals are for your pond. If you want a lot of waterfowl, pheasants, and other ground nesting species around; you could consider removing some of the furbearing animals that feast on the eggs and young of birds. Skunks and possums seem to be worse than Coon, IMO, because they hunt around water but rarely in it, so they encounter nests more often than Coons who are most often right down at or in the water. It rarely hurts to remove a few of the above mentioned animals from the population anyway as they are species that are commonly effected badly when a disease enters the population. That being said, you have to really decide what you are ok with and what is crossing the line for your goals for the habitat.

"At what point does a pondmeister intervene with natural animal events?"

Remember, you did that when the trackhoe took down the first tree starting on the pond.

But LNP hasn't been "natural" for 2-3 hundred years, arguably for 10-12 thousand. You haven't seen any wolves, woods elk, or wooly mammoths around, right?

As lmoore stated, it's all about your goals. You may have to control predator species like coons or skunks to manage for waterfowl. (Judging from gobbler populations around here, I don't think they'll hurt turkeys. But I am no turkey expert, I'm just a guy who can see 20-30 turkeys several times a year.)

You may find yourself (re)reading Dan Van Schyke's (sic) columns in PB Mag more closely. He covers a lot of game management philosophy.

Great question, and hard to answer.

Mother Nature is pretty good at keeping a balance on her stage. Some of the actors are not attractive, or even considered villains, but they have their role. Predators don't usually wipe out prey. They hunt whatever is plentiful. When there are diminishing returns on their hunting time, they move on. This leaves the desirable prey species depleted, but they can easily replenish their numbers. If predators are wiped out, prey populations can explode of course.

Even removing the muskrat could have unintended consequences, though I can't think what it may be. (maybe overgrowth of cattails and water lilies, or starving out predator species).

I think the main natural enemies of muskrats are snakes, raptors, mink, skunks, and raccoons.

We have few muskrats here, so I can't be precise. We do have lots of beaver, because their natural predators have been decimated. The result is, ponds are drained by burrowing beavers, and there is a $20 reward from the county for each beaver tail. If we had left the snakes, bobcats, and gators alone, we wouldn't be in this pickle.

Good luck with your dilemma B'ski. I know you will do what is best, because you aren't killing first and asking the questions later.

Brettski, besides wood duck houses, these mallard nests can cut down on predation.
http://www.deltawaterfowl.org/ddp/henhouses/build.php

Thanks AP...got's 2 of 'em now for a couple of years. Not sure if they have been used yet.

+1
Probably not the philosophical discussion that you anticipated. But you've already intervened in "animal events." You dammed up an area and flooded it. Did you think no animals or insects called this area home prior to your intervention?

This is the old question, would you take one life to save one life? Would you take one life to safe thousands?

At LNP you created an ecosystem that did not exist there previously, providing water for birds, mammals, reptiles, fish, insects. You drew new populations of animals to an area that they may not have been drawn to previously.

As pond meisters we are constantly making this decision. Do we not cull skinny bass? Do we not remove unwanted species of fish?

It's too late to grow a conscious, so it's time to grow a pair.

I will never allow anyone to trap on land again after my dad allowed a bobcat trapper onto our ranch at a neighbors request. We lost all of the neat ringtail cats(and just about everything else that eats meat) and when the game warden heard about it he came right over and told us we could shoot all the 3 legged deer that we saw. Shot 6 of them that fall and found a few more dead.

Theo and JHAP, I somewhat agree with your statement that I have already started man-made selection by changing the landscape during construction of the pond. But I also disagree. We altered a small percentage of a large contiguous and consistent forestland. Yes, we would have decimated specific homes and nests of any species living within that clearing footprint, but we did not remove the entire environment that they would need to survive. We just moved them over a little bit and left them plenty of room to live and propogate in the exact same environment....just a couple hundred feet away from where they last resided. I want to say that we added improvements to their environment by adding the pond, but now that I think about it, maybe the pond drew in new species that might provide new pressure on the species that safely resided there without the water magnet.
hmmmmm......

I am not a gunslinging ruthless killer, but I do eat lots of animals and kill TONS of fish that are not in my management plans. I am still a steward of the land and completely respect everything God has given me to take care of. Death is a necessary part of life.

Growing up I was taught to eat everything that I kill, but that is not realistic for me at this stage. There is however always a valid useful reason for everything that I do kill.

Good answers here. I think you, Theo, and JHAP are all correct in your posts. Yes, the pond did cause a disturbance in the natural ecosystem that was there, and yes it also brought in new species. However, the species who live in dry woodland environments are all the same as those who live in or near water. In a sense, you made a trade. You don't need to feel like you effected the former residents in a terrible way. A small woodland area like what you cleared for the pond can only hold so much wildlife. I believe woods have a much lower biomass/area than ponds and the area imediately around ponds. The amount of wildlife which you effected will likely not be noticeable in the overall picture. There are advantages on both sides of the argument. Trapping and hunting in moderation will not negatively effect your area. When animals of a certain species are removed, the percentage of young that reach adulthood generally increases. Over trapping or hunting can be very negative. Generally, an area will fill up with all the wildlife it can handle. You can try to control what moves in, or you can let nature decide. If you do let the man trap other furbearers while he is taking care of the muskrats, you may want to ask him to be mindful of leaving a good population behind. For example, he could trap for the other furbearers for only a week or two. This will probably leave a good broodstock to replenish the population for the future. As long as you trust him to be responsible, he will probably be mindful of that on his own because he will want some left to replenish future possibilities for trapping on your land.

Jeffrey, what did you mean 3 legged deer? Is that literal or am I missing something?

I better go before I start to ramble.

It's so damn hard to get a consensus from all three stooges.


HA! Made you think.

When I look out over our pond and see the fish swirling at the surface, hear the call of a bull frog, watch a dragon fly perch on a nearby reed, I realize that our pond provides a place for life to flourish. Did I alter the existing ecosystem? (No actually the pond was there already, so unlike Brettski, I'm not a mass murderer. Sorry Bski, I'm just practicing up on my guilt skills).

I'll bet in the long run you provided a habitat that will give more life than the life that will be taken away in order to ensure the viability of Liberty Nature Preserve.

There ya have it folks, my 14th good post!

13.33

Another question for you and D-ski to ponder. What part do you want "LN" to "P". In my mind, if I had bought some land to presreve it natural state, it would remain untouched for nature to slowly do it's thing. Like you, I want the enjoyment of seeing the animals drawn to my creation and want to keep it as "Natural" as possible. I am a natural hunter in my part of nature and have no problem busting a varmint here and there.

Like Bobad noted, we will opt for no action as our first reaction.
Another good example. We planted some 1200 shrubs and conifer seedlings. We knew there would be some deer browse, but never dreamed that they would annihilate the new stock. Grrrr!!!! Nope, not gonna hunt the deer.

And just think how much that timber was changed from its original makeup by past logging that probably high graded and changed its species makeup. The forest edge holds the most diversity so by carving out an area for the pond you have changed from pure forest to a diverse range of habitats. Add the pond and you have your own little oasis that will draw all types of animals whether you wnat them or not.

Gretski, for cryin out loud, as much ice time as you've had, chill already! Hockey was great before you and your bro playedl and it always will be. Same with nature. If ya had cleared 461 acres to put in a strip mall then maybe a bit of delima but you guys have done a wonderfull thing. Be proud!

Whoo Hoo! Pandoras box is now open!!




























Now that I got that out of the way, LNP has to have some defined goals. Just like our national parks, which allow no hunting/trapping, and everything is supposed to be in it's natural state, they do not allow natural fire progression. There is a species of pine that needs a fire (but not too hot of a fire) to open it's pine cones and release the seeds for natural propagation. So, if the natural fires are suppressed, fuel continues to stockpile until a big fire starts and the seeds get burned upon release.

You've got to break some eggs to get an omlet.

You're changing the habitat by adding nesting boxes, etc. You are adding food sources for snapping turtles by having more ducklings. What will you do when you see the ducklings disappearing?

Back to goals. What are they, what are you trying to accomplish?
You as man are manipulating the environment, (pond, nesting boxes, etc.) but as such you also have to act as the apex predator as well. Think wolf, mountain lion, coyote, raccoon, skunk, turtle, opossum, mink, etc., all rolled into one BUT with a thinking brain, (and opposable thumbs).

Brettski,
I am guessing that your property will get managed just like your pond, with you taking care of its needs.

I know you have set your goals, so what you are dealing with now are the choices as a result of the goals. Probably no different than your everyday routine, only a different scale.

Dealing with the muskrats is your answer to your question, yep you are going to manage the environment on your property.

I think all of us do to some extent or other. My new pond has less than a dozen fish remaining from 1100 that were stocked as a result of me not doing anything. The heron and little cormorants had a different set of goals than me.

Brett, you and Donna have built an amazing place. I think you have no choice but to protect the integrity of the pond. Perhaps the muskrats can be a part of the scene by putting sparce "Natural" riprap that holds down chicken wire around the pond banks you prefer left alone. Your stand of native grasses will completely cover it soon enough. It could be a great compormise.

I also liked that your trapper ASKED if he could do more and graciously accepted you denial. IME, People that ask are rarely a poaching/trespassing concern.

When I was in college, there was a family who owned a little over 1000 acre near the University. The family managed it as a nature preserve and for years wouldn't allow hunters to hunt deer. Then one year a wildlife and fisheries science professor did a study on their property with their permission by constructing several 10 acre enclosures that kept the deer out. There was an enclosure that had been closed off to deer for 37 years. A couple more were more than 20 years old.

The comparison between the forest floor that had deer browsing and those areas that were enclosed was amazing! The diversity of plant life was incredible inside the enclosure. Needless to say, the family decided to allow deer hunting. As much as they loved the deer, they realized they were not managing a natural ecosystem. That man needed to step in to control the deer herd. Hunting was not done for trophy bucks. It was done to manage the deer. The vast majority of the deer killed were adult does. Illinois, just like Virginia doesn't have wolves anymore. We don't have mountain lions either. Forest fires are not allowed to burn uncontrolled but are put out long before they can have the effect they once did, that was keeping prairies grass and not trees.

Opossums are not native to Illinois. They migrated north as food opportunities and warmer climates prevailed. Raccoon numbers were much lower back then, wolves are major predators on raccoons and keep their numbers in check. Trapping WHEN done ethically and responsibly rarely affects non target species negatively.

The hunters that I hunt with and myself would love to shoot a wall hanger buck. However, we all shoot far more adult does than we do bucks. We do our part to keep the deer herd in check and balanced. I can't say all hunters are that way though. If you do continue to allow trapping and consider allowing people to hunt on your property, just make sure you set guidelines you want followed on your property... It is your place and you set the rules. If the rules are broken, those who break them will no longer be welcome. I hunt on about 20 different pieces of private property each year. Each owner has their own set of rules and desires and I follow them to a tee. It is a great privilege for someone to trust you enough to allow you to hunt on their land. I always ask first and make sure I follow the property owner's wishes.

"If ya had cleared 461 acres to put in a strip mall then maybe a bit of delima but you guys have done a wonderfull thing. Be proud!" Joni Mitchell couldn't have said it better, Bob-O.

Muskrats and ponds dont't mix. I gotta do something. Bluegill and hybrid catfish taste much better than muskrat.
I will leave the other critters alone for now. Never have to worry about what to do with fish scraps. Put them by the pond and between the coons and buzzards, not a scale left. It is a little eerie, though. to be fishing and 20 buzzards sit in a dead tree cheering me on.

CJ:

I think you are spot on. It's amazing what the deer will (and how much) they'll eat. I'm like you, I think my buck to doe take is around 20 or 30:1. DU did a study a while back and found that if the predators (coons especially) were reduced, the number of ducklings surviving were greatly enhanced. Man has to take the place of the apex predators that are no longer in the local ecosystem, and with the low fur prices, he's not doing such a good job due to the lack of incentive. The raccoon population took a dive here a few years ago due to mange. It wiped out about 80% of them, but they're back with a vengence now.

A neighbor that runs a daycare in her house had a whole family of 'coons in her backyard during the day that were eating the mulberries that were on the ground. She had to keep the kids inside because the 'coons wouldn't leave if someone went outside.

I think Brettski will be able to take a more active role in the wildlife management portion of LNP after the garage apartment is done.

Considering that they both like to birdwatch, he might re-think letting the trapper remove some coon, 'possum, etc. Doing so will take some pressure off of the nesting birds. It'll be a constant battle; it's amazing how fast Mothere Nature fills a void. It's always a balancing act between predators, prey and the available space/resources for them.

We haven't even mentioned feral cats yet, have we?